What is the Commander X8?

codewar65 · Post by **codewar65** » Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:07 am

I am not interested in a x8. I will purchase the x16 and eagerly await an x32. LOL

More is more.

TomXP411 · Post by **TomXP411** » Tue Mar 02, 2021 9:38 am

6 hours ago, Terrel Shumway said:

I hope that this doesn't mean that "stage 3" will be a cut down spec. :0(

Peri and Lorin have both said that all 3 stages will have the same specs, although stage 2 or 3 might not have the expansion ports. (Although if Stage 3 is entirely FPGA, we could see certain expansion options built right into the FPGA.)

Perifractic · Post by **Perifractic** » Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:14 pm

Actually as per the FAQ stage 3 might have some features removed (or to be clearer, some features may not be possible) whilst it may have other Enhancements, hence X16E. I say this only to clarify they won’t all be exactly the same, just as different models from any manufacturer are usually not all the same in features. But yes, the X8 was/is an idea that may never materialize on the market. It’s far too early to discuss the X16E let alone any possible X8… Perifractic, X16 Visual Designerhttp://youtube.com/perifractic

x16tial · Post by **x16tial** » Wed Mar 03, 2021 12:35 am

I just want to throw out there, while it may be terribly obvious, that simpler is going to beat more complex.

You're already dealing with a small-ish market, how many people under age, say 30, are even going to be remotely interested in retro stuff? Some yes, but your largest market is going to be older-ish folks yes?

This market is probably going to have a fair amount of discretionary income, therefore drop any options that save on the initial purchase price, I'm mainly talking about RAM here, just fix it at the 2MB and go. (The optional keyboard is fine, I'm talking about internal specs)

This market is going to have more money than time, don't make the consumers or the developers that will exist in this market spend time trying to sort out permutations of all kinds of configurations, set the specs and then in higher Phases, just reduce form factor. A handheld CX16 sounds awesome. I'm even starting to think a speed boost may not be a good idea in higher phases, since it might break existing software's timing (unless the speed is configurable, easily)

The most successful portion of the C64 market (all the games, then and now, and all the demos then and now) relied on stock hardware (I said *most* successful portion of the market).

Having all kinds of configurations, while sounding nice on paper, is more likely than not going to muddy the waters, causing fragmentation and confusion, and hurting your market penetration, in my opinion.

My 2 cents. Thanks.

Perifractic · Post by **Perifractic** » Wed Mar 03, 2021 3:48 am

I just want to throw out there, while it may be terribly obvious, that simpler is going to beat more complex.
…
Having all kinds of configurations, while sounding nice on paper, is more likely than not going to muddy the waters, causing fragmentation and confusion, and hurting your market penetration, in my opinion.
My 2 cents. Thanks.

I certainly agree with that, which is why X8 hasn’t been publicly mentioned (until someone discovered a page that wasn’t meant to be public). Our 3 tiers as announced a year ago are as simple as we can be. Best, better, good.

Right now we’re focusing only on the best model, the X16P. Can’t wait till you guys see it fully working. Announcements when we have them…

Perifractic, X16 Visual Designer
http://youtube.com/perifractic

Cyber · Post by **Cyber** » Wed Mar 03, 2021 4:08 am

3 hours ago, x16tial said:

This market is going to have more money than time

Can't disagree with this, but I remeber numerous posts, where people said that price is crititcal obstacle for them. Plus don't forget shipping. So despite target product consumers are not broke kids, the price tag still needs no be as low as possible.

x16tial · Post by **x16tial** » Wed Mar 03, 2021 4:47 am

35 minutes ago, Cyber said:

Can't disagree with this, but I remeber numerous posts, where people said that price is crititcal obstacle for them. Plus don't forget shipping. So despite target product consumers are not broke kids, the price tag still needs no be as low as possible.

I agree to a point, but if the lower price comes at a cost of complexity, it's probably not worth it, in the long run. Personally, I'd rather it not be obtainable to some, if the choice ends up being it not being produced at all. Which would happen if there's low market uptake.

Cyber · Post by **Cyber** » Wed Mar 03, 2021 4:57 am

6 minutes ago, x16tial said:

I agree to a point, but if the lower price comes at a cost of complexity, it's probably not worth it

Totally. Being simple is one of the project goals. Being cheap is another goal. X16 team is doing their best to reach a golden mean between these two.

BruceMcF · Post by **BruceMcF** » Wed Mar 03, 2021 12:25 pm

8 hours ago, Cyber said:

Can't disagree with this, but I remeber numerous posts, where people said that price is crititcal obstacle for them. Plus don't forget shipping. So despite target product consumers are not broke kids, the price tag still needs no be as low as possible.

Really that is exactly why two or more models would exist ... the kit-buildable design cannot be below a certain price threshold as a commercial product ... even as a commercial product with a quite modest margin. And that is what some people are jonesing for. And at the same time, some people will compromise on through pin chips if it slices enough off the purchase price. Setting details aside as the design team sees fit to nut them out, that seems like the CX16P and CX16C in a nutshell.

And some people will be happy with hardware that works like a CX16P, even if its all in FPGA without any ASIC processor, VIA, sound chip or any of it. There's your CX16E.

If, EG ("eg" means, "free example", or in other words, nothing official, just tossing it out as an example of cost shaving), the CX16C was a 1MB SRAM with the Low RAM allocated to the top 5 banks, it would be compatible with any software designed to run on a single through-pin SRAM CX16P system, and would be just a few high RAM segments short of the RAM of a CX16P with two through pin SRAM chips. So the Vera circuit on the main board, a single surface mount SRAM chip, a surface mount flashROM, a surface mount 65C02, surface mount VIA's, the sound chips, and a CPLD to replace (sigh) all of that lovely CX16P glue logic, and you could have a system that is substantially cheaper to build, including fitting on a smaller board.

Even the design sequence makes sense, because getting the addressing and chip select all worked out with glue logic means that there is a working target model for the CPLD that is one of the keys of cutting down the build cost ... because even if the glue logic are not individually very expensive, the commercial board assembler still has to place them and solder them.

TomXP411 · Post by **TomXP411** » Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:09 pm

On 3/2/2021 at 8:14 AM, Perifractic said:

Actually as per the FAQ stage 3 might have some features removed (or to be clearer, some features may not be possible) whilst it may have other Enhancements, hence X16E. I say this only to clarify they won’t all be exactly the same, just as different models from any manufacturer are usually not all the same in features.

But yes, the X8 was/is an idea that may never materialize on the market. It’s far too early to discuss the X16E let alone any possible X8…

Perifractic, X16 Visual Designer

http://youtube.com/perifractic

I'm still holding out for a MiSTer core. ?